Improving perceptions of cognitive-behavioral therapy with brief website exposure: Does neuroscientific allure impact attitudes?

- The general public has limited knowledge about CBT for anxiety disorders.
- Tested whether briefly viewing webpage improved CBT knowledge and perceptions.
- Evaluated whether neuroscientific explanations of change uniquely promoted CBT.
- CBT perceptions and knowledge improved after viewing psychoeducational webpage.
- Neuroscientific explanations did not improve perceptions, may undermine knowledge.

Background and objectivesThe current study aimed to determine whether brief exposure to a webpage about cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) for the anxiety disorders improved knowledge and perceptions of this treatment. Further, this study tested whether participants were uniquely compelled by CBT if the mechanism of change cited neurological processes.MethodParticipants (N = 389) recruited online viewed a webpage screenshot that described CBT for anxiety. Participants were randomized to view a version of the webpage which either described the mechanism of change as: 1) psychological, 2) neurological, 3) combination of neurological and psychological, or 4) no mechanism described. Participants completed measures of knowledge and perception of CBT before and after viewing the webpage. Credibility ratings and symptoms were assessed after viewing the webpage.ResultsKnowledge of CBT was limited and perceptions were largely neutral to somewhat positive at baseline. Both knowledge and perceptions of CBT meaningfully improved after viewing the webpage. Mechanism of change did not impact perceptions of CBT or its credibility, though in the neurological and combination conditions there was less improvement in knowledge than in the psychological or control conditions. Greater symptoms of anxiety were associated with slightly less improvement in knowledge and perceptions.LimitationsThe study did not include long-term follow up, so the durability of the effects is unknown. Further, sample homogeneity undermines broad generalizability.ConclusionsThere is significant room and capacity to improve lay-people's knowledge and perceptions of CBT. Neurological explanations did not appear to uniquely promote the perception of CBT or its credibility.